- From: Jeremy Carroll <jjc@hplb.hpl.hp.com>
- Date: Mon, 1 Oct 2001 11:53:33 +0100
- To: <scott_k_peterson@hp.com>, <www-patentpolicy-comment@w3.org>
I am convinced by the argument that the process for public comment has been unsatisfactory. See for instance: http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/2001Oct/0005.ht ml http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-patentpolicy-comment/2001Sep/0750.ht ml It seems particularly dubious to have only one period in which public comments are accepted and to short circuit normal processes such as making a working draft available before a last call draft, and having a Candidate Recommendation phase. From: http://www.w3.org/Guide/LastCall I note the following guidance: "The Working Group estimates which W3C Working Groups and other parties should review the last call draft. It is preferable to secure review commitments before announcing the last call. " The rush of last minute comments suggest that the Working Group failed to estimate clearly which other parties have a clear interest in review of the last call draft; and singularly failed to secure review commitments. The draft states "we believe Consortium policy regarding the interaction of patent rights and Web standards is of significant importance to the community-at-large, so we are seeking public comment". Following this, it is reasonable to extend the comments period to allow deeper public review. Contentfully: I am concerned about the building block nature of Web standards. A genuinely useful standard is used as a building block by other standards; any standard produced under RAND is then unusable as a building block by a RF standard. I think this is likely to undermine the overall standardization effort of the W3C. Jeremy Carroll Please note: this message is my personal opinion; Scott represents HP's official opinion.
Received on Monday, 1 October 2001 06:53:57 UTC